If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I got around to upgrading from the CP to the RP versions of Windows 8 today and hit what I think is a pretty ugly problem.

They've decided to make NX extensions mandatory to install W8 - which completely rubbishes their System Requirements (1Ghz or better CPU) and cuts-off a LOT of older PCs into the bargain.

It also makes a laughing stock of the line that "the same hardware which ran W7 will run W8" - that couldn't be less true if they tried.

OK, we're talking older laptops and pre Core2 desktops but there's still a LOT of those out there - more than MS's extimated 0.1% of machines (taking part in the pre-release - not likely to want to use the retail version!)

It's unusual for MS to swipe through something this big - I have a desktop here with an HT (fake dual-core) 3.4Ghz CPU which has run W7 happily for years but which cannot run W8 (it's the last P4 without NX) - that's slightly sucky...

Won't affect most people but I thought it was an odd thing for them to do and a quick Google suggests I'm far from the only person thinking that!

p.s. another issue for older computers is that they've chopped-off support for a lot of older 'legacy' devices - which in real terms are things like laptop sound and network devices, dongles, plug-in soundcards and network adaptors etc. You can get around this with some hackery but it's not ideal (Windows Update will overwrite your working drivers with non-working ones, for example)

Ok. I got around to dual booting the Consumer Perview (though the post above and my old laptop makes me wonder if i should have tested the RTM one). But I haven't had much chance to play around or install any software.
It sure boots fast, but the interface is definitely going to take some getting use to (took google to find out how to turn it off! God, this must be what my parents feel like every time they use a computer!).

So far my hope for a refreshed polished version of vista hasn't really worked out.. it's remarkably unpolished. But I guess I'll get used to it soon enough.

Quick question - I guess I need to start installing AV and firewalls to secure it all up and slow it all down? I'm guessing the security upgrades etc... haven't removed that requirement.

It also makes a laughing stock of the line that "the same hardware which ran W7 will run W8" - that couldn't be less true if they tried.

To be fair, the majority of fairly recent computers will run Windows 8. A lot of the older hardware would still be struggling with Win7 or Vista before it. Your cited CPU isn't one of them, but come on, it's a P4. There comes a point where it's useless to keep supporting legacy devices that few people use. A lot of the old desktops and laptops are well overdue for an upgrade, which is what a lot of people will probably be looking at with "that new Windows thingy" coming out. MS have been remarkably good at legacy support all things considered, sometimes to their detriment. I don't think it's reasonable to expect them to keep supporting old devices well into the future...

Originally Posted by BillButNotBen

So far my hope for a refreshed polished version of vista hasn't really worked out.. it's remarkably unpolished. But I guess I'll get used to it soon enough.

The Consumer Preview had a number of significant issues that didn't get patched. There's an Enterprise Trial version of Windows 8 if you want an actual RTM build to play with (legally).

Originally Posted by BillButNotBen

Quick question - I guess I need to start installing AV and firewalls to secure it all up and slow it all down? I'm guessing the security upgrades etc... haven't removed that requirement.

Up to you. Personally I don't run a firewall - Windows Firewall has offered inbound and outbound protection since Vista (and possibly XP SP3, can't remember) and my router also deters most random attacks by default. Windows Defender does a pretty good job for most forms of malware and is enabled by default. Failing that you can just grab MSE and use that I guess, but how many people are running full blown firewalls and AV packages these days? The primary threat is from adware/spyware which makes securing your browser the far more important factor, as well as watching what you download.

To be fair, the majority of fairly recent computers will run Windows 8. A lot of the older hardware would still be struggling with Win7 or Vista before it. Your cited CPU isn't one of them, but come on, it's a P4. There comes a point where it's useless to keep supporting legacy devices that few people use. A lot of the old desktops and laptops are well overdue for an upgrade, which is what a lot of people will probably be looking at with "that new Windows thingy" coming out. MS have been remarkably good at legacy support all things considered, sometimes to their detriment. I don't think it's reasonable to expect them to keep supporting old devices well into the future...

Dropping support for P4 vintage CPUs is understandable, but dropping it between versions this way isn't nice.

The thing is, those P4s are actually still decent CPUs - they were still being sold "new" in systems less than 4 years ago and are STILL sold in preowned/refurb systems.

I seem to see one about once every 2-3 weeks in some shape or form (some will be latter models which do have NX - but most are not)

The much bigger issue is legacy hardware - it took me EONS to get a Realtek AC97 soundchip to work - do you know how many of those there are out there!?!?

It's very unusual for Windows to slam-the-door on legacy hardware in this way - esp when they're selling this as the first Windows upgrade which doesn't need better hardware!?

Also - don't waste your time with the Consumer Preview now - they've changed almost everything about it in the Release Preview - it's almost a completely different product (and has bigger demands on hardware). I forgot to put a 1Gb memory chip back into my test laptop and so installed and ran it with just 512Mb memory and it ran for a while and then crashed 'spectacularly'!! With 1.5Gb it's still not great tho...

It's outdated, and 99% of people use newer stuff. Refurbished computers are a tiny niche. AC97 is ancient news too.

Also, why do you even need Windows 8 on old computers?

You have absolutely no idea how this stuff works do you? You're like the people on the Windows forums, wagging their finger at anyone with hardware more than 2 years old - telling them they're "wrong" for wanting to upgrade DESPITE MS telling them that they can (there's one prick who answers every question by questioning their reason for wanting to do it - like it's his business!)

I fix PCs for a HUGE range of people and I see older kit all the time - and their owners are getting the hard sell on newer versions of Windows and want to run those (and MS are telling them - in effect - that they can). When I tell them they can't, they want to know why. It's worth remembering that PC tech has stagnated in the last 3-or-so years thanks to reduced demand/increased costs and people being broke. The 'new' laptops people bought in 2011 aren't much different to the ones from 2010 or 2009 - the rate of increase has slowed dramatically and thus we have more, older hardware around than ever.

MS says 0.1% will fail the NX test - I'd say it's 10s of times that (they're going on people trying the trial which is far from a representative sample). They probably like the idea it's pushing people into getting new hardware, but this is a new approach for Windows and allied with their approach to their 'store' (which you know will be run with all the finesse of XBL or GFWL) is worrying.

Windows has historically supported a VAST range of hardware going back decades or more - because the maintenance issues involved when you slam-the-door on computers which people are still using is astonishing (and the bad press isn't great either). Commercially speaking, many businesses can make their hardware last longer and longer these days - and they never bought state-of-the-art in the first place - and commercial sales were always the aim with MS - but they're now pushing that aspect quite hard.

This is the first time MS have imposed anything like this scale of scaled-up hardware 'requirement' with a new OS - they do it with incremental versions and they did it with 64-bit and it's requirement for signed drivers of but the bottom-line is that many people are using older kit and expect to run W8 (and will therefore buy it) because MS are telling them it will work (and it won't).

Which means more work for me (good) except that all I can say is "it won't work" (bad) and that's not helpful...

Not that I really wanted to upgrade anyway - but I'm not the people who's computers I fix and they don't always listen to me when MS are bombarding them with "newer, faster, shinier"...

p.s. I doubt anyone working on PCs hasn't run into Vista or W7 needing a bit of a kicking to get some devices to work (unsigned drivers or disabling Windows Update for some drivers) - well W8 will stop that from working at all - is the bottom line of it.

You have absolutely no idea how this stuff works do you? You're like the people on the Windows forums, wagging their finger at anyone with hardware more than 2 years old - telling them they're "wrong" for wanting to upgrade DESPITE MS telling them that they can (there's one prick who answers every question by questioning their reason for wanting to do it - like it's his business!)

2 years? Yes clearly P4 processors are only 3 years old tech.
And way to go calling me a prick AND dodging the question. I think that speaks for itself.

2 years? Yes clearly P4 processors are only 3 years old tech.
And way to go calling me a prick AND dodging the question. I think that speaks for itself.

I know 2 people who've bought a P4 system 'brand new' inside the last 4 years - and I know 20+ who are still using a P4 system (50/50 between XP and W7) and are happy with it.

I also know 30-40+ who have laptops with Realtek net/sound chips which W8 will grumble about - it's weird, one laptop just decided it does support it's Realtek soundcard (no updates applied, it just started working after a restart) but the other remains solidly 'silent'.

Secondly, I didn't call you a prick - I called someone who asked the same question you did on MS's support forum a prick - the difference here is we're discussing something (so your question is just odd) wheras he was basically trolling people.

You are both replying to the perfectly reasonable question "Why does W8 claim to run in W7 hardware when it won't" with the question "Why do you want to do it?" tho. Think about that for a moment. it's like me ringing my mobile provider and saying "I can't seem to make any calls on your network" and them replying "Why do you want to call someone right now?" :)

People WILL do this - they'll see the "runs on the same hardware" thing and it will go south. There's 100s of people already raising the NX issue online and that's just people trying the preview!!

You have to understand that the world is not about what people 'should' do (in your opinion) - it's about what people WILL do - and people with laptops running ancient Realtek junk WILL be trying to put W8 on there - people with older Intel desktops WILL get that lovely 5D 'please fuck off' message on bootup.

The core issue is that MS are making a claim which is WILDLY untrue - which when you take that, the business with the restrictions in the store and other issues, makes me wonder if this isn't going to be a miserable few years for computing (and quite possibly the last few years for it as people move onto other platforms entirely if MS get this wrong).

You are both replying to the perfectly reasonable question "Why does W8 claim to run in W7 hardware when it won't" with the question "Why do you want to do it?" tho. Think about that for a moment. it's like me ringing my mobile provider and saying "I can't seem to make any calls on your network" and them replying "Why do you want to call someone right now?" :)

People WILL do this - they'll see the "runs on the same hardware" thing and it will go south. There's 100s of people already raising the NX issue online and that's just people trying the preview!!

You have to understand that the world is not about what people 'should' do (in your opinion) - it's about what people WILL do - and people with laptops running ancient Realtek junk WILL be trying to put W8 on there - people with older Intel desktops WILL get that lovely 5D 'please fuck off' message on bootup.

The core issue is that MS are making a claim which is WILDLY untrue - which when you take that, the business with the restrictions in the store and other issues, makes me wonder if this isn't going to be a miserable few years for computing (and quite possibly the last few years for it as people move onto other platforms entirely if MS get this wrong).

Hey, I started out by saying MS were going about this the wrong way. They led people along, so removing support at this point is NOT okay. I'm simply talking about the hypothetical situation where they were clear about this from the start; in that case, it's not unreasonable to remove support for very old hardware.

I thought the P4 was retired over 4 years ago (replaced by Core 2 in 2006, shipped for a while after but with dwindling market share surely). Anyway, new Windows versions are more often installed on brand-new computers, and nobody's buying P4s today.

You are both replying to the perfectly reasonable question "Why does W8 claim to run in W7 hardware when it won't" with the question "Why do you want to do it?" tho. Think about that for a moment. it's like me ringing my mobile provider and saying "I can't seem to make any calls on your network" and them replying "Why do you want to call someone right now?" :)

I don't disagree that their original statement was a smart move. But I also think that you're making a bigger issue out of this than it needs to be. Yes, you see lots of old hardware still in use. I get that. But there's no requirement for future operating systems to have such extensive backwards compatibility. Most (all?) of the Windows 7 Certified systems will run Windows 8, which if MS wanted to weasel out of it might make the statement somewhat be true. The more pressing point is that the minimum system requirements listed don't make reference to the type of CPU, just speed.

Originally Posted by trjp

You have to understand that the world is not about what people 'should' do (in your opinion) - it's about what people WILL do

No, the world absolutely is about what people should do. If we always worked on what people will do, we'd never get anywhere. To use a silly example (since you pulled out a ridiculous telephone example), some idiots will fail to wear a seatbelt and splatter themselves all over the road, but that doesn't change the fact that we should include seat belts and tell people to wear them.

People will avoid change because they're comfortable with what they have. If people had their way, Vista would never have happened, and the transition to the new kernel (which would have been Windows 7) would have been infinitely more painful. Or we'd just be stuck on that towering mess that was Windows XP.

Failing to support old hardware is not cause for a crusade. So what if people want to use their old hardware on a modern OS? The fact that they will try is no justification for going out of your way to support it. Unfortunately some people have to be dragged forward. For a lot of people if they're told that their hardware is out of date, they'll just buy a new system (probably a laptop these days) and the issue is resolved. Those who don't upgrade don't get the new OS. So what?

Just tell your clients what I tell my obese patients - your current lifestyle/system is unsustainable and is incompatible with continued enjoyment of your life/digital pornography.

Also - don't waste your time with the Consumer Preview now - they've changed almost everything about it in the Release Preview - it's almost a completely different product (and has bigger demands on hardware). I forgot to put a 1Gb memory chip back into my test laptop and so installed and ran it with just 512Mb memory and it ran for a while and then crashed 'spectacularly'!! With 1.5Gb it's still not great tho...

Grrr. Wish i knew that before downloading 3.5gb and faffing around with installing it.

Though actually, installing was pretty easy... but then i remembered what a hassle it is to install all the software. I need to work out what it's done in terms of drivers as well, and what it's done with my network. And why it seems to have set my bios clock to another time..